This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: catch(...) and forced unwind
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- To: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>, jason at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, mark at codesourcery dot com, drepper at redhat dot com, jakub at redhat dot com, ncm at cantrip dot org, dave at boost-consulting dot com, wekempf at cox dot net, fjh at cs dot mu dot oz dot au
- Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:52:48 -0800
- Subject: Re: catch(...) and forced unwind
- References: <xypwu91ofvf.fsf@miranda.boston.redhat.com> <20031212183754.13f4864b.bkoz@redhat.com> <20031215222143.GL25423@redhat.com> <20031215163906.5263801a.bkoz@redhat.com> <20031215224621.GN25423@redhat.com>
I'd just like to add that yet another reason to go with
explicit rethrows instead of implicit rethrows is that
the compiler expects that
catch (...) { }
consumes all exceptions, and so will DCE EH cleanups for
objects in outer scopes of the same function. Disabling
this optimization is almost certainly a bad idea.
r~